Show RE CE NT FINING DECISIONS DE visions ci prepared for the mining review I 1 star sure rev of cicini the official survey of land entered as A mining claim alliy m ly serve seive for foi a second application after the cancellation of the first faist entry the c cancellation ancel lation of the first entry in which tile the survey was a part pa r t not affecting it or 01 prohibiting the use of a copy in a subsequent application for a patent for the same pi benuses shank v II holmes olmes supreme court of arizona 17 pacific rigilo to possession wh where ere a person peaceably enters on unoccupied and public lands of the united states to discover dis coer oil or 01 other valuable mineral deposits such person acquires a right to continue in possession so long as ile he occupies the land to the exclusion of others and diligently and in good faith prosecutes thereon the work of endeavoring endear 01 ing to discover dis coer mineral therein smith v union oil co supreme court of california pacific default in work AV orli service of notice of failure of a cotenant in a min inin ng claim to contribute his proportion of expenditures required for representation work upon the administer adminis administrator tr ator of such coten ants estate was not legal service upon such co owner as required lequir ed by bi rev st U S sec 2321 21 U S colip st 1901 p 1426 tile the actual co owners the heirs heir s of the delinquent cotenant being the poisons persons to receive hecei L service OHan loll v ruby gulch mining alining co supreme court of montana pacific 9 1 l itla A title under mineral location merely without discovery of minerals I 1 is good as against all persons excel t tile the united st stites ate S hullinger Hullin gei vs s big besne oil co district court of appeal california pacific |